The swimming community in the Washington area has been rocked by news that a prominent swimming coach, Rick Curl, has been accused for having sexual relations with an underaged girl in the 1980s. The report below details a settlement under which the girl agreed to remain silent about the allegations — allowing Curl to continue to coach and participate in the U.S. Olympic team staff. USA Swimming has issued a statement on the controversy.

Curl is the founder of the Curl Burke swim club and has now taken a leave of action. For full disclosure, three of my four children swim in this area for the Chesterbrook Tiger Sharks which are the Division One champs (which is part of USA Swimming). They have not been part of the Rick Curl program, though it is a well known presence in the area and has many elite swimmers.

Kelley Currin, whose maiden name was Kelley Davies, had decided to break the agreement after decades of silence. She said Curl had sexual relations with her for four years beginning in 1983, when she was 13. At the time, he was 33.

Currin’s parents, Gerald and Pamela Davies, learned of the alleged relationship after reading her diary — soon before she left for the University of Texas on a swimming scholarship in 1987. She says that their lawyer discouraged them from going to the police. I am not sure why any lawyer would give such advice. Indeed, it seems to raise serious ethical issues in light of the serious criminal offense. Moreover, I am unsure why parents would yield to such advice. Putting aside the natural impulse to mete out justice on a personal level, I cannot imagine treating this as a simple civil matter as a parent particularly given the risk of a habitual offender in this category of crime. However, in 1989, the parties reached a non-disclosure agreement under which Curl agreed to compensate the family $150,000 over 11 years for the “pain and suffering experienced by her” if she agreed not to press charges or speak publicly. Paying for an alleged victim not to go to police raises ethical issues.

First, I am skeptical that such an agreement could be enforced on public policy grounds.

A lawyer representing the aggrieved party in a case in which there is potential criminal as well as civil liability should also be cautious when a potential defendant requests a non-reporting agreement because the aggrieved party threatened prosecution before seeking advice of counsel. In such a case, and particularly if the potential defendant remains unrepresented, the lawyer who represents the potential plaintiff/complaining witness must bear in mind that it is a form of extortion, punishable as a felony, to obtain property from a person by instilling in him or her a fear that, if the property is not delivered, the actor or another will accuse some person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against him. N.Y. Penal Law ss 155.05(2)(e), 155.30(6). It is an affirmative defense to this crime that the accused “reasonably believed the threatened charge to be true and that his sole purpose was to compel or induce the victim to take reasonable action to make good the wrong which was the subject of such threatened charge.” N.Y. Penal Law s 155.15(2). If it is unreasonable to believe that a crime was committed, or if the property sought from the potential defendant has a value in excess of that required to “make good the wrong,” the lawyer representing the potential plaintiff/complaining witness must withdraw the client’s threat. Otherwise, the lawyer risks becoming an accomplice to extortion, and violating DR 7-105(A) as well as DR 1-102(A)(3) (illegal conduct involving moral turpitude) and DR 1- 102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation).

Such agreements seem a modern version of “blood money” systems that are still used in some Middle Eastern countries. Historically, a person would be jailed until he paid the family of the victim what they demanded. In this case, the settlement was made to avoid a criminal charge.

The saving grace for the attorney can be the fact that the client is asserting innocence and making no concession of guilt. Thus, the settlement is ostensibly based on the desire to avoid the publicity associated with such claims and not necessarily to avoid legal process.

Curl, who coached Tom Dolan to three medals in the 1996 and 2000 Olympics, recently attended the U.S. Olympic trials in Omaha.

Currin, now 43, says that she simply got fed up with remaining silent even though she agreed to the terms when she was 19. It has been 23 years. She says that their lawyer told them that Andrew Sonner, then the Montgomery County State’s Attorney, told him or her that Curl would get only “a slap on the wrist.” That raises a host of other legal questions. One is whether Sooner was informed of a statutory rape case and did not take action or encourage the charge to be filed. Sooner says he has no memory of the conversation. Another question is the questionable advice: a statutory rape charge against a person with supervision of children usually results in serious punishment. Being a coach in charge of young girls would constitute a major aggravating factor.

Finally, there is the question of criminal charges after decades of delay. In Virginia, there is no statute of limitations for sexual assault. Given the statement of the alleged victim, it will be interesting to see if prosecutors move to arrest Curl. That would place both his and the Davies’s lawyers in a precarious spot of being called to a grand jury with a host of privilege and ethical issues.

In response to the article that appeared in the Washington Post today, Rick Curl has decided to take a leave of absence effective immediately. Pete Morgan will assume the role of Head Coach of the Curl Burke Swim Club. In addition, Tom Ugast, Director of Operations at CUBU since 2010 will continue to process all management functions on a day to day basis.

Curl Burke Swim Club takes very seriously the health and well being of your children that swim for our Club. All of our coaches value the time they spend with the swimmers. As a Club we follow USA Swimming’s “Safe Sport” program to help ensure the safety and well being of everyone involved in our sport.
In 2010, all of our head site coaches attended the first seminar put on by Potomac Valley Swimming in conjunction with USA Swimming to educate our coaches in athlete protection.
In 2011, under the new policies that were adopted by USA Swimming, Curl Burke adopted a program that includes a code of conduct for our coaches, training in athlete protection, and mandatory background checks of all coaches. We strive to create an atmosphere that is safe and nurturing to all of our swimmers.

This article is painful for our Club. If you have any questions or concerns going forward, please contact Tom Ugast.

90 Responses

She was 13 in 1983 when the alleged statutory rape began and he was 33 and it continued for 4 years … and Sandusky founded his Second Mile Charity in 1979 and made it all the way to 2012 … and that creepy priest, Lynn, endangered children for decades and was just sentenced in 2012

” … a statutory rape charge against a person with supervision of children usually results in serious punishment” … except in the fields of sports, religion, and politics.

In light of all we’ve learned in the past few months including the rape case in Louisville … understanding the parents’ actions as their 19 year old daughter was getting ready to leave for college in 1988-89 on a swimming scholarship is not really all that difficult.

Now, let’s see how the law handles the prominent swimming coach, Rick Curl, today.

Adults together with other peoples children should have 24/7 supervision. That is for now a solution.

Who knows how many others at his swim club are in the on same perversion? That applies to everywhere; Penn Stete included.

As for the parental and girl’s decision. Understandable, but they left her successors open for heightened risk for sexual assault. Is that a crime? Why not? Do you have a legal choice in reporting a known criminal due to certain public risk? Certainly not an ethical choice IMHO.

Disgusting story. When so many adults allowed a child molestation case to go unpunished, including the parents, is truly amazing. The lady in question was right to go public now, but how many other “victims” are out there?
Prof. Turley poses some interesting questions about the attorneys who knew of this crime and did nothing and in some cases actually allegedly advised clients to not report the crime!

No surprise.
I am beginning to think they should treat coaches as they do many many chronic pain patients: as potential felons first (many are asked to sign opiod contracts allowing, among other things, random urine testing.)
When the doctor who committed med. mal against me testified perjuriously (the Pa Superior Court said so) the state AG refused to prosecute saying ‘not enough basis’ (he testified facial paralysis “major and common complication” in 2 depositions then “unknown” on the stand). Gov. Ridge had doc as his health commissioner despite knowing of the perjury: this was purely political. The next administration I talked with state AG office. Att’y told me they would have prosecuted but missed statute of limitations (by only a few months).
I wonder if Curl was a “name” at the time or big enough player that the AG did not want to get involved.

Sexual abuuse is abominable. As as old as prostitution.
And is as Jesus pointed out re the poor, they will always be with us.

While I have proposed 24/7 surveillance of sport coaches of children here is another matter.

Children sports and how they are practiced is our choice. It is also genetically driven as perhaps sexual abuse is. But we find it good for our children.

BUT IS IT IN THE FORM AND WITH MESSAGE AND GOALS WHICH IT ENTAILS OR FOLLOWS? I SAY NO..

This was posted at another blog. There I complained about their softpeddling the Penn State thing. But my main point was this:

“Big time sports is a sickness, Any fool can see that. Letting sports and alumni pay for funds needed for stadiums and to equip labs is bad for education..

Even childrens’ sports is totally corrupted. We use them to activate, motivate and teach the competitive spirit. But we expose children to false values, teach them to expect and desire the rewards of stardom, not the inner values they need.

At Johathan Turley’s law blog, the main question refers to that surrounding this headline:
Leading USA Swimming Coach Accused Of Statutory Rape . . . 23 Years Ago
.
Read it if you will.

But the problem is based on our culture where kids are entered into the proff sport culture at 6 years of age. That there are sexual abusers comes as a secondary matter in my opinion..

Sexúal abuse is widespread in our socíety. But prof sport training and its ethics to be best, to win at whatever cost has been our choice. Oddly even the educated are susceptible too. We can avoid exposure risks to sexual abuse, but we can permanently, college by college, child sport club by sport clubm CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE SUCH CULTURES WITH THEIR CORRUPTION BY MONEY AND THE MONEY DRIVE. Mens sana……!

Please remember: SPORTS BUILDS CHARACTER!
I guess it just doesn’t build quality character. The drive for success undermines whatever good can come out of sports. Too many people play only for the brass ring (big buck contract, gold medal, scholarship) and not for enjoyment of self-improvement. That gives too much power to the coaches & hangers-on that are associated with winners.

Here is support from unbiased sources to my post above, see UEL for link:

“kinmapper

I am pleased to reply (as comments are not working) to this fine exposition of many of my thoughts. I second it with no reservations on any part of it.

However I have more to say. Having taught football players at a major football power of the South through a half decade of instructing beginning math classes to freshman mainly up to seniors to graduate (it might as well as been Mycenaean Greek to some of them), it is incumbent upon me to mention that there are normally two types of academic improprieties: those known by the sports leadership and those not even noticed by the sports leadership.

Penn State added a new extraordinary category of unholy crimes committed by members of the sports section including ones involving misprision of felonies of the most horrendous sort short of murder by torture. This I know nothing of and my position matches idealist707 as to Penn State and the partial failure of the editorial.

In my time, I discovered one of my F students playing football the next season much to my surprise. At one of our home games, his more recent math teacher sat near me but could not identify his photo in the team photo while I could!!!……………………”

He writes more on need for student ID presentation at exams, etc. And sports passes dealt out to cheaters.

An investigator for USA Swimming obtained the paperwork from Currin back in April but USA Swimming did nothing until now.

“The alleged victim Kelley Currin released the following statement attacking USA Swimming and the process.

“It is disappointing that USA Swimming has known about Rick Curl and his admission for several months now and has chosen to act only when the Washington Post reports the admission.

I faxed the settlement agreement and admission by Rick Curl to a USA Swimming investigator in April of this year. I also followed up and communicated via phone with USA Swimming’s Susan Woesnner, the so-called “Athlete Protection Officer”. I know now that Woesnner was giving me lip service by saying they were sympathetic but then going ahead and giving Rick Curl coaching credentials to the US Olympic Trials in Omaha, Nebraska. For USA Swimming to tell the media that they just learned of my complaint late last Friday afternoon” (July 20), is an outright lie. There was nothing sent to USA Swimming on July 20 that it did not already have in its possession. The only thing that changed is that the Washington Post got involved. Only then did they give the appearance that they were concerned about my complaint.”

coming after Sandusky perhaps people will be beginning to reassess the whole amateur sports industry that begins to train promising children rigorously at early ages. These coaches that purport to instill work ethic values in children and build their character are most merely ego-driven, self-serving individuals mouthing pious platitudes about their operations. Then too, parents get themselves caught up in the hoopla and find their lives revolving around their children’s sporting activities. There is much to be said for the work that goes into mastering a sport, but their over-emphasis perhaps leads to such abuse.

“Finally, there is the question of criminal charges after decades of delay. In Virginia, there is no statute of limitations for sexual assault. Given the statement of the alleged victim, it will be interesting to see if prosecutors move to arrest Curl.”

*******************************

There is also an allegation in the Complaint that the minor was taken to California for a swim meet and molested there as well raising the possibility of federal crimes such as under provisions of the Mann Act.

dealist707
1, July 26, 2012 at 4:22 pm
“There is much to be said for the work that goes into mastering a sport, but their over-emphasis perhaps leads to such abuse.”

PERHAPS? Does it or doesn’t it.

I think it does. And that is what I have written.

The great praying at the American fighting spirit altar is the cause in my mind. And every parent who helps his child pray there is indicted in my mind of child abuse—-their children’s moral values only, but more worthy of contempt for that.

It’s a fact of life … Curl is very important to the USA Swimming crowd which is probably why they didn’t want their investigator officially handing over the documentation Currin gave him/her back in April to them.

The adult women who now preaches against the coach has earned the wages of sin. So she was 13. She knew what she was doing was wrong. If she was in Tahiti she would be married off at 13 and have kids already. The perp who porked who knew it was wrong but there is only one remedy. Criminal justice. The victim and her mommy and daddy chose to extort money from the perp. They should be sued to pay it back. Simple justice. The itchnbay broke her promise not to bark.

Matt, yes mespo is a lawyer. He is modest, but I will say it for him: He is an excellent lawyer.

As for accusations from 23 years ago, most states have no statute of limitations on child abuse or murder. It does not matter. That is why the remaining Nazi concentration camp guards still living are running from justice even now, seven decades after the fact. No statute of limitations.

OK, the abuse was obviously real or there would not have been a $150,000 contract to avoid consequences. But the girl’s decision to go public now is perfectly OK. People break contracts all the time. The perp can sue her for breaking a contract — but he has to show three things:

1 – that the contract was legal — oops, it was not.
2 – that the girl who contracted was doing so with “informed consent” and that informed consent would have to mean that she understood the ramifications of the contract. Since it was an illegal contract, she could not, by definition, understand the ramifications of it.
3 – that the breach of contract was the “direct and proximate” cause of damages to HIM, to the perp, the swimming coach.

See, there, that number 3 is a problem. Because he cannot claim as damages that people continue to think he did not do wrong, when he knows that he DID DO WRONG. He cannot claim as damages that he can be prosecuted for a crime he did not want to be prosecuted for, because that is not a benefit he is allowed to get by contract. He is also not allowed to get that benefit by any other means. A person is only allowed to get that benefit — not to be prosecuted — by making a deal with the people that benefit COMES FROM. That “people” is the state. The state would be destroyed if criminals could privately pay for the right to contract away prosecutorial power. Think of it. A mafia-hit-man could pay for the right to kill somebody and have their family be unable to testify against him.

Our state has a vested interest in NOT allowing individuals to contract away the rights of the People of the State. Although it happens, the way it usually happens is by government corruption, where private deals are cut — usually without written evidence of the calumny — and the people’s rights are alienated without them even knowing about it. But to write it down, make it a contract, let money change hands, and then rely upon the enforceability of a contract that is itself a per se crime — I don’t think so.

This girl — now a woman — is wise to reveal the criminal conduct that led to this very dirty piece of “legal” destruction. It is a social problem of the greatest magnitude and if we don’t deal with it every whichway, it will continue to make our society into a complex pack of filthy lies.

Matt J, I’m not aiming this above comment at you, but I am inviting you to think about why I say it. The right of the People (represented by their law enforcement officers) to protect their society from this kind of crime cannot be bargained away by individual parties, regardless of how much they would like to control the situations they find themselves in. I’m actually feeling that you will give my comments a thorough and open-minded consideration and I welcome your responses.

A person is only allowed to get that benefit — not to be prosecuted — by making a deal with the people that benefit COMES FROM. That “people” is the state. The state would be destroyed if criminals could privately pay for the right to contract away prosecutorial power. Think of it. A mafia-hit-man could pay for the right to kill somebody and have their family be unable to testify against him.
===============
Um, what?

This girl — now a woman — is wise to reveal the criminal conduct that led to this very dirty piece of “legal” destruction. It is a social problem of the greatest magnitude and if we don’t deal with it every whichway, it will continue to make our society into a complex pack of filthy lies.
=================
Um, what?

Accusing a 13 year old of knowing what she was doing when the much older coach was having sex with her? Barking dog, a comment like this makes me never want to read your comments again. Yuck.
Still waiting, as I’ve been with some recent cases of rape and violence ,for somebody to make a link to ‘men’ and no, not all men of course. My mother’s rule #1 to her sons: if I ever hear you abuse(d) an underage girl in any way, I will make sure to personally castrate you. A bit harsh? So is life for so many girls and boys suffering from violation.

Matt J, when this contract was made, the girl might not have been thinking about what it would really mean, to her, to other girls who trained, to other girls who were in other situations where they got exploited, to other young people who were in situations where they were exploited, on and on and on. Who knows what she was thinking when this contract was made. But she chose later to repudiate the contract and to reveal what happened. I’m not sure I know why, but who cares. To hide the fact of the violation was, regardless of the reasons for that choice to hide it, basically an act that hurt our whole society. IF THESE THINGS ARE REVEALED right away, firmly, openly, with the full force of indignation that they should engender, we are ALL better for it. If the first alter boy who was molested by the first priest had been able to reveal it right away and for there never to have been a period of everyone hiding things like this, how much better off everyone would have been.

So now, she reveals it, 23 years later. Who cares how much later it is! It was destructive to hide it, 23 years ago. What do we know about this guy’s conduct with other swimmers training with him? What do we know about what would have happened, had the truth come out when it should have come out?

That’s what I mean.

The contract was destructive.
In point of fact children and other powerless people are exploited and abused constantly, and very rarely have a chance to reveal anything about it, and have plenty of reasons to just shut up and “suck it up” and most of them do not even get compensation for their silence.

It is destructive, and it has a corrosive effect on our society, and good for this woman that she revealed this, even though 23 years later, and let the chips fall where they may.

I didn’t mean to be so confusing. I’ve been unable to write coherently ever since listening to Sean Hannity for more than 30 seconds, about a week ago; some day soon I hope to be able to realign my brain cells. :mrgreen:

Matt J: About the right to contract away, in a private contract, the state’s right and responsibility to enforce its laws, here is what I meant.

A guy commits statutory rape against a 13-year-old girl.

The guy does not want the “People of the Commonwealth of Virginia” to have and exercise THEIR RIGHT to punish him for that crime, which their elected officials have decided is a punishable felony.

So the guy buys the proposed “complaining witness”‘s right and obligation to testify against him in a court of law — for $150,000.00

Thus, something that belonged to the People of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the right to enforce its laws and to compel citizens to give sworn testimony as material witnesses to crimes they have witnessed) is sold by one person (presumably the parents of the complaining witness) to another person (the alleged perpetrator of the statutory rape) and the Commonwealth was not a party to the agreement.

NOT O.K.

If a hit-man for the Mafia were to kill somebody.
And the dead man’s family were to accept $1 Million for their agreement not to testify against their decedent’s killer.

Would that be OK?

I suggest that it would NOT because although the Mafiosi and the decedent’s relatives might be pleased with their private deal, they sold the right of the state to effectively outlaw murder.

So now, she reveals it, 23 years later. Who cares how much later it is! It was destructive to hide it, 23 years ago. What do we know about this guy’s conduct with other swimmers training with him? What do we know about what would have happened, had the truth come out when it should have come out?
=========
Does the Leading USA Swimming Coach have a history of that kind of conduct? It was 23 years ago. Are there any other accusations in the last 23 years?

BarkinDog, if you wanna hump some b*tch and she either wants it or doesn’t kick your balls hard enough to make you stop, that’s generally considered OK because the law of the pack is supplemented by the fact that puppies don’t give off the “hey handsome!” smell until their time.

But we have a different kinda pack going here, even though as you point out two legs is baaaaaaaaad. We have some curs who haven’t grown up proper and nobody fixed them right. They go by something other than the proper signals from Mother Nature; they go by something perverted and we, as a pack, pretend we don’t allow it. If they start f*cking with a puppy we’re supposed to get real b*tchy about it, and we wrote that down, in case some of the doags caint remember.

So among us, we have some piles of sh*t folks occasionally step in. We also don’t need to pretend we don’t smell it, when that happens.

raff, agree completely. Seems we have a small handful of commenters who are almost continually intent on derailing discussions with outrageous comments or total non-sequiturs. I just choose to ignore. The great behavioral psychologist, B.F.Skinner, identified the Law of Extinction. Extinction is the lack of any consequence following a behavior. When a behavior is treated as inconsequential, producing neither favorable nor unfavorable consequences or responses, it will occur with decreasing frequency until the targeted behavior stops altogether. In other words, do not reward undesirable behavior with either positive or negative reinforcement. In layman’s terms, ignoring is the best policy when dealing with annoying people.

You promised me: “I did not attack anybody. I will refrain” on a previous thread. You are attacking now by playing the stubborn child again. Don’t play the child. You are attacking by replying cryptical, nonsensical, and poorly developing your points. Get it?

Your, implied point of a contract 23 years ago must be honored and a questionable unproven case of no more sex crimes by the coach DOES NOT hold water.

Malisha went to elaborate efforts to show first others here what was what, and more to help you understand it.

During hers and others attempts to enlighten you (and attack you in some cases–but that is how some do here), you have stood fast with your little boy defiance.

Listen to me please:
1 You can not buy from a private person the state’r right to make justice deals.
2.The state’s right has no time limit.

And the ethics of contract violation on YOUR scale of ethics may be given, and argued if anyone is willing to take the discussion. But is not legally relevant here.

It was an illegal contract, and thus not a contract. But that is another matter.

I have supported you in some matters and found good in some things you have written when you were “sober” as I have called it. Now you prompt other reactions from me.

OS properly make the point that any response to you is a form of enabling (my interpretation), and cites Skinner’s solution of not responding. I have apparently been adjudged worthy of this treatment. But it is you I am talking about now.

Ask yourself why you WANT to be stubborn. Disruptive. Obtuse. And reply such as: “Umm, what?”

Ask yourself if you don’t want to get help in finding where these impulses or life tactics come from and why you need to use them.

You make rather rapid transitions from one mode to aother which is beyond my understanding. If fact all of it is beyond my kin.

You have mentioned that “it” had led to you getting fired. Looking for more? What are you wanting to do here? Are you re-fighting that battle again here? Hoping to win here? A therapist might know. Ask OS for help in selecting a therapist of the type you need.. He just might do so

Matt, others — by the way my guess is that there were other girls he coached and “did other things with” but in the 23 years that this one did not reveal it, neither did those others. Remember how many people (and what proportion of people) DID NOT REPORT sexual abuse, date rape, child molestation, clergy abuse, etc etc etc etc for years and years and years in our history as a society. In fact, most of the books that have come out about this problem in the last 40 years have commented on or even been titled [some form of] “conspiracy of silence.”

Here’s how it goes: victim feels shame and shock; those to whom victim may speak at first are confused and/or unwilling to believe or deal with it; silence is the option most often chosen.

This is an easy route to take. It used to work 99% of the time; now it probably works 75-80% of the time; how can it be measured when there is no control group.

I bet if you did a huge study of 100,000 people, segregated by age (over 70, over 60, over 50…) you’d find:

The older people in the sample are, the more unreported sexual abuse appears in their personal histories.

23 years might even be the average amount of time it takes to disclose. But who’s counting?

Malisha: What if he was building a huge business and really did not do what he is being convicted of ! What is the parents were only looking for a big payout on a diary they found of their daughters who may have had a “mad crush” on him. Why did they settle for 150K and no push for police to get involved. “What if that money was paid just to shut them up and only that so that his business would not be ruined”… I don’t believe it played out this way but “what if”…. I guess he could sue her then. Either way someone is getting what is deserved !

If all these things, let the big boy put in his papers and make his case. Why should HE be afraid of telling the truth? He should face the same issues in his life as we all face: if we are wrongfully attacked, and we have to defend, then well and good, let us fall back upon the support of our friends, the good will we have built up in our lives, and the rest of it, and let us come out swinging and show the world who we really are.

That’s it. It is not unfair for him to be defensive if he has something to defend, and it is not unfair for him to clear his name if it needs to be cleared.

And then somebody can make a movie out of it. Da da da da da da da — who would write the soundtrack music, do you think?

We need the equivalent of FOX news (in drawing power in a specialized news channel.

Let’s call it “Injustice in Your Family’s life”.
Let’s fill it with solidly based “sniff” programs, some with a happy ending. some with catastrophes.
Put in at late hours talking heads with deeper content for the intellectuals. Late hour (recorded) extended debate program, with tough and qualified program leaders.

Hurston is the inspiration for my continuing belief that I have the right to bore people with my stories.

Cameron, I haven’t seen Matt J pretend to be a lawyer. Sometimes people get mistaken for pretend lawyers simply because they cotton on to what the law is pretending to say even without going through the education and getting the degree. I showed up in Iowa in a trial once, clearly told the judge I was not a lawyer, and explained that I was helping the pro se litigant with the papers and with her exhibits etc. He gave me permission to sit alongside her like her secretary and assist. The lawyer for the other side got pissed and reported me for “practice without a license” trying to get me charged with a crime. I got a threatening letter from the Attorney Discipline Board asking me to respond to the charge. I didn’t respond. I figured, if I’m not a lawyer, I don’t have to respond to a lawyer disciplinary board letter. Sure enough they all blew themselves away. If they had a crime to charge me with, they knew where I was — at the address they sent the letter to. The point I’m making is that if someone doesn’t CLAIM to be a lawyer and doesn’t file papers in court pretending to be a lawyer, they can be presumed to be a “NAL” — not a lawyer. I think that applies to Matt J.

Humanoids do not know how to run a dog pack. The 13 year old kid’s parents cut a deal with the perp and their part of the bargain was to keep quiet for some cash. Since they were barking for her, so to speak, they must now pay up for her breaking their bargain. A deal to not squeal is a deal. However, the dog pack talked this over last night and the consensus is that Coach Willard or what ever his name was, should not be a coach, nor a teacher, nor a principal, nor a janitor, in that school. Or any school. Nor should he draw unemployment. He needs a job out in the real world. This is another example of why we dont need sports in schools. Send the perp to State Penn. It usually takes a kid about six years to matriculate there so give the guy six years– one for each hump he made all those years ago. And do not let the inmates there give him the name HumpinDog. Its already taken.

BarkinDog, with regard to “A deal not to squeal is a deal,” you may think that’s true, but here’s how that deal gets enforced:

1. A deal not to squeal is a deal.
2. Blabby broke the deal, after they got $150,000 for it.
3. Poopy Doopy is really mad about that, but it’s not criminal, it’s civil.
4. So Poopy Doopy has to go hire a lawyer (Let’s make him Mr. Pugh of the law firm “Pompy, Puffy and Pugh, Limited Liability Partnership” commonly known as PPPLLP) and he gets a $30,000 retainer to sue for breach of contract and slander. But whom does he sue? Oh what the Hell, let him sue Blabby and Blabby’s parents. We’ll see how that works out.
5. Blabby and her parents don’t have to look very far for lawyers; lots of lawyers are already writing her and her parents letters asking for the case.
6. Blabby countersues for a few million dollars — name a figure.
7. The contract breach case goes to court, enhanced by now by the slander case, the counterclaims and the press reports, wow times superwow, and law school students start to write papers on the case, for credit.

Think of the jury trial. Have you got tickets for your dogpack to attend?

Remember the contract in the Baby M case by the time it reached the Supreme Court of New Jersey?

Matt J: A DC lawyer told you slander and defamation are crimes? Defined as crimes? REALLY? I want to check that — not that I disbelieve it per se but that I want to see it and understand it. I thought it was a “tort” and not a crime, and your saying that it will cost well into five figures to prosecute it makes me believe “tort” and not “crime” because nobody charges a complaining witness for a prosecution of a crime; that’s the business the state has to pay for, not a private party. But I will check.

See, I do know there’s a difference between a justice system and a judicial system; we do not have, never did have, and never can have a justice system; we have the judicial system that has led to all the stories posted on this blog and many that are even worse. I agree with you.

I’ll report back with whatever I find about slander and defamation being criminal or civil. If I were a betting person and if I had anything to bet, I’d lay money on “tort” and not “crime.”

Idealist, Matt Sandusky’s real mother tried over and over again to get the state to make sure her son was not in the control of Jerry Sandusky; repeatdly she was rebuffed, LEGALLY. Sandusky adopted the boy when he turned 18. I figured out why he waited: Had he done so before the boy was 18, he would have had to go through a full Juvenile Court proceeding to terminate the mother’s parental rights; she would have had the right to counsel to defend those rights. There would have been subpoena power, etc. and maybe the mother would have been able to get her kid back. So by waiting, Sandusky left the courts with the ability to rebuff the mother without giving her either representation or a chance to put in evidence. She never had the jurisdiction of a court to let her advocate for her son but she was deprived of her son without the process of adoption being followed.

THIS IS KEY IN THE DENIAL OF RIGHTS: Do whatever you want to do without allowing a complete evidentiary record to be compiled. In other words, Jerry got the kid, had the kid, controlled the kid, molested the kid, and never had to show anything about his fitness as a parent, adoptive or other. Meanwhile, the mom lost the kid without being proven either dangerous, unfit or inappropriate. NO EVIDENCE and NO PROCESS and just, “let’s do what this guy wants and keep it out of court until it’s moot.”

OK, maybe there are cultural references out there that I don’t understand because I’ve been asleep for 100 years like Rip Van Winkle. I didn’t get it still but I’m going to rest, and if it comes up again, I’ll try to float around the web researching it. I don’t know how to make the right quizzical face
maybe this: }-)

Leejcaroll, I understand your frustration 100%. I have been involved with a vexatious litigator (whose very life depends upon his being able to do more damage to me) for 35 years. I have had many lawyers and most were both dishonest and frankly atrocious. Yet I had a Virginia lawyer (Rob Surovell) who was both honest and decent! I had another Virginia lawyer who was deceitful, dishonest and vindictive (toward his own client, for wanting him to do his job!) but who had a history of being very effective and very righteous — go figure! And I had a series of other horrible lawyers and then again, two more good ones (Paul Victor Jorgensen from Maryland and Catherine English from Portland, Oregon). I have worked for fabulous, outstanding, honest and brilliant lawyers (who remain unnamed simply because they were never involved in the kind of law I later ended up retaining lawyers for, and they probably wouldn’t want their names on this blog in Malisha’s commentary). In fact, the reason I was able to be fooled by lawyers so often is that I presumed they were as honest and righteous as those for whom I had previously worked (as a legal secretary). Thus, I couldn’t imagine they could be liars, thieves and thugs. Live and learn.

Part of the problem is that the courts are corrupt. Often the lawyers begin to excuse little acts of corruption because they are working within a system where the huge giant unmistakable acts of corruption are there in your face all day every day. It’s like advice I once saw to people trying to lose weight: It said DO NOT GO OUT FOR MEALS with friends who are all overweight; go out for meals with thin friends, because that encourages you to eat like a thin person, whereas if you’re at dinner with three people heavier than yourself, you tend to eat more. I think the lawyers are like overweight people out to dinner with morbidly obese diners; they think their own portions are not all that big, compared to others’ — in fact, one of my lawyers told me not to worry about bringing out the truth in a hearing because, “Nobody expects the truth; everybody expects one degree of lying or another degree of lying.”

In California, Judge Mark Juhas actually said from the Bench that an attorney lying about something that could be PROVEN NOT TRUE was OK because “a certain amount of that is just advocacy.”

When the system is producing this strong a stench, the uniformed workers (the suits, both genders) in the industry cannot help but pick it up, to one degree or another.

Strangely, although my story sounds like a “sad commentary,” it is actually provable in all its little tiny pieces. Of course, nobody wants to look at such a thing. My kid tells me that I need to organize all the papers that prove all these things, get them into the form in which they can be understood, compile the “dossier,” and do something with it. But I look at it, even as it is now, comprising two large 5-drawer slide-drawer file cabinets encompassing courts of seven states, 21 defendants (my ex sued anyone who testified for me until finally I couldn’t get anybody to testify because nobody could afford the three to four years of litigation that would ensue) and all that crap, and I realize that any small part of it could prove something. But who cares what all or any of it could prove? Because our entire system is FUBAR, and proof means as little as merits mean, and nothing means anything when you have a gun, and they have big guns, lots of them.

We don’t even have a structure in our society that can honestly and credibly stand up and say that, like the one they have in for-chrissake-YEMEN, “this is the opposition.” We have nothing here. And perhaps we deserve nothing. We may just go on blogging and blogging and it’s full of sound and occasional fury signifying nothing. Elipses…

I have a story to tell you from Delavan, WI, but I won’t do it. Had to do with somebody whacked in the middle of the head while she was asleep.

Some 28 year old guy drove all the way from Seattle to put an axe in his mother’s face while she was asleep. The cops said why didn’t you hit her while she was awake. He said it’s classified and I was afraid to hit her in the head while she was still awake. The CIA told me to do it.

I’d like to look at some sweaters.Never mind.Don’t fall for it!As you know, I am a very kind person.What horrible weather!Growth, however, brings new problems and concerns.Growth, however, brings new problems and concerns.When was the house built? Knowledge is power.To tell the truth, I don’t like disco.